Freeman v. A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc.

         Argued May 29, 2019

         Appeal from the Superior Court in the judicial district of Hartford, where the defendant was defaulted for failure to comply with a court order; thereafter, the court, Huddleston, J.

         Kenneth A. Votre, New Haven, for the appellant (defendant).

         Richard F. Wareing, Hartford, with whom was Daniel S. Blinn, Rocky Hill, for the appellee (plaintiff).

         Keller, Bright and Devlin, Js.

          OPINION

          PER CURIAM.

         [191 Conn.App. 111] The defendant, A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc., appeals from the judgment of the trial court awarding supplemental attorney’s fees to the plaintiff, Sharay Freeman. In the underlying action, the plaintiff brought a two count complaint in which she claimed a violation of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, General Statutes § 42-110a et seq.,

Page 543

and fraudulent misrepresentation related to the defendant’s failure to refund the plaintiff’s $2500 deposit for an attempted sale of a used vehicle. The trial court found in favor of the plaintiff on both counts, and this court affirmed the judgment on appeal. See [191 Conn.App. 112] Freeman v. A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc., 174 Conn.App. 649, 651, 166 A.3d 857, cert. denied, 327 Conn. 927, 171 A.3d 60 (2017). On August 17, 2017, the plaintiff filed with the trial court a motion for supplemental attorney’s fees. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court subsequently granted in part the plaintiff’s motion for supplemental attorney’s fees and awarded her $49,980.

          In the present appeal, the defendant claims that the court (1) erred in awarding the plaintiff supplemental attorney’s fees, and (2) abused its discretion in awarding attorney’s fees in the amount of $49,980. We disagree.

         Our examination of the record on appeal and the briefs and arguments of the parties persuades us that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. Because the trial court’s memorandum of decision fully addresses the arguments raised in the present appeal, we adopt its concise and well reasoned decision as a proper statement of the relevant facts and the applicable law on the issues. See Freeman v. A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc., Superior Court, judicial district of Hartford, Docket No. CV- 13-6045900-S, 2018 WL 2306605 (May 3, 2018) (reprinted at 191 Conn.App. 110, 213 A.3d 542). It would serve no useful purpose for us to repeat the discussion contained therein. See, e.g., Woodruff v. Hemingway, 297 Conn. 317, 321, 2 A.3d 857 (2010); National Waste Associates, LLC v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Co. of America, 294 Conn. 511, 515, 988 A.2d 186 (2010); Tuite v. Hospital of Central Connecticut, 141 Conn.App. 573, 575, 61 A.3d 1187 (2013); Nestico v. Weyman, 140 Conn.App. 499, 500, 59 A.3d 337 (2013); Green v. DeFrank, 132 Conn.App. 331, 332, 33 A.3d 754 (2011).

          The judgment is affirmed.

          APPENDIX

         [191 Conn.App. 113] SHARAY FREEMAN v. A BETTER WAY WHOLESALE AUTOS, INC.^[*]

          Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford

          File No. CV-13-6045900-S

          Memorandum filed May 3, 2018

          Proceedings

          Memorandum of decision on plaintiff’s motion for supplemental attorney’s fees and costs. Motion granted in part .

          Daniel S. Blinn, for the plaintiff.

          Kenneth A. Votre, for the defendant.

         OPINION

          HUDDLESTON, J.

          The plaintiff, Sharay Freeman, seeks $65,791.24 in supplemental attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA), General Statutes § 42-110a et seq., incurred in defending an appeal by the defendant, A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc. The court previously found the defendant liable under CUTPA and common-law fraud for misleading the plaintiff about the refund-ability of a $2500 deposit on a used car. (# 132.) The plaintiff was awarded $2500 in compensatory damages, $7500 in punitive damages, and, in a subsequent

Page 544

decision, $26,101.50 in attorney’s fees. (# 148.) The Appellate Court affirmed the judgment, and the Supreme Court denied the defendant’s petition for certification to appeal. See Freeman v. A Better Way Wholesale Autos, Inc., 174 Conn.App. 649, 166 A.3d 857, cert. denied, 327 Conn. 927, 171 A.3d 60 (2017).

         [191 Conn.App. 114] The defendant objects to the motion for supplemental attorney’s fees. (# 153.) The court heard argument on the motion on April 3, 2018, and held an evidentiary hearing on April 13, 2018, at which the plaintiff’s appellate attorney testified. For the reasons stated ...